PRI to consider new principle focusing on systemic risks

The UN-backed Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) is considering a seventh principle that will focus on broad financial system systemic risks.

The six principles were written before the global financial crisis and are focused on environmental, social and governance (ESG) integration. Now, a decade after their creation, consideration of systemic risks is on the agenda and part of a consultation with signatories regarding a 10-year blueprint for making responsible investment mainstream.

Managing director of PRI, Fiona Reynolds, says this will include policy and behavioural issues affecting the financial system.

She said this would include the role of asset owners in addressing policy issues, the role of stock exchanges, and the impact of high-frequency trading, short-term payment incentives and short-term mandates.

The PRI will conduct a consultation with signatories regarding the development of a seventh principle in the middle of next year.

The six principles were developed 10 years ago and are focused on implementation and the effect of ESG on portfolio holdings. But the PRI’s mission is focused on an economically efficient and sustainable global financial system, so the evolution of the principles to include systemic risks is a natural step.

Sponsored Content

“We believe that an economically efficient, sustainable global financial system is a necessity for long-term value creation. Such a system will reward long-term, responsible investment and benefit the environment and society as a whole,” the PRI mission says.

PRI has engaged an independent Dutch consulting firm to measure the PRI’s impact over the past 10 years and will launch this document at its tenth birthday celebrations in New York next April.

Separately it will produce a blueprint outlining the areas of focus for PRI in the next decade in making responsible investment mainstream. This will include interviews with signatories about systemic risks.

“We are recognising that as universal owners, asset owners are in the whole market so they have to care,” Reynolds says. “We’re calling this PRI 2.0 internally, and focusing on what we need to do to get to the next level.”

Speaking at conexust1f.flywheelstaging.com’s Fiduciary Investors Symposium at Chicago Booth School of Business in October, Martin Skancke, chair of the PRI Advisory Council, called on investors to step up to the conversation about the systemic risks such as carbon risk and long-term stability of markets.

“The asset owner perspective is missing. Asset owners are not necessarily in the market daily, they are removed from the market, but are paying the costs of an inefficient market,” he said.

“You should be asking ‘What does a good trading place look like for me? Who should be allowed to trade? How should information regarding trades be made available and to whom?’ These are really important questions and asset owners are absent from the conversation.”

Skancke said some of the perceived conflicts between ESG and fiduciary duty come from a misconception.

“For me it’s about the stability and usefulness of the financial system itself,” he said.

“It is seen as responsible investment limiting the investment universe. All investors exclude assets for various reasons; for example, you don’t believe in the business model, don’t like the market, the investment doesn’t meet cashflow requirements. It’s just another constraint.

“For me it’s about widening your information set, not limiting the investment universe. How do you organise the information set and take a broader view of the risks you’re taking?”

ESG as a fiduciary duty is about raising the standard of corporate behaviour generally, he said.

 

The six principles are:

Principle 1: we will incorporate ESG issues into investment analysis and decision-making processes

Principle 2: We will be active owners and incorporate ESG issues into our ownership policies and practices

Principle 3: We will seek appropriate disclosure on ESG issues by the entities in which we invest

Principle 4: We will promote acceptance and implementation of the Principles within the investment industry

Principle 5: We will work together to enhance our effectiveness in implementing the Principles

Principle 6: We will each report on our activities and progress towards implementing the Principles

 

 

 

Leave a Comment

Sort content by

The impact of the mega manager

The impact of size is a delicate point for asset managers. For specialist asset classes, and boutique managers, being small and nimble can be a source of alpha. On the other hand, being large can reduce fees and increase innovation and product offering. But now there is evidence to show that the emergence of the

The contested role of asset consultants

Asset consultants are a key part of the investment chain, providing small funds with services that include decision making processes and strategic asset allocation, and for larger funds traditionally playing a key role in manager and strategy selection. But a study by Gordon Clark and Ashby Monk, which is part of a broader look by

Demystifying private equity

US public pension funds, on average, have around 9.4 per cent allocated to private equity but for many public funds monitoring the firms that manage these investments – including the transparency of underlying investments, fees, performance and benchmarking – as well justifying these investments to boards and stakeholders, takes up more than 10 per cent

Why investors employ smart beta strategies

The common view is smart beta is used to side step expensive active equity managers or hedge fund managers whose processes are on the surface opaque, but on close investigation turn out to be largely beta like in approach. As investors have gained experience and familiarity they have also learnt about how it offers greater

Managing culture with risk management techniques

The interaction between governance, culture and performance is increasingly a topic around asset owner board tables. But little has been written about the relationship between culture and the financial crisis, and how to change culture in financial services organisations. Andrew Lo, professor of finance at MIT, has come up with a proposal to change culture

Why integrated reporting makes sense: Robert Eccles

Robert Eccles has been trying to change the nature of corporate reporting for more than 20 years. He has been an advocate for supplementing financials with information on non-financial factors that are leading indicators of financial results – such as product development, customer satisfaction and the development of intangible assets. The premise is those companies

Previous